Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-05-14 Human rights in the People's Republic of China

Mediation Case: 2006-05-14 Human rights in the People's Republic of China
Please observe Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal.

Request Information

 * Request made by: John Smith&#39;s 21:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Where is the issue taking place?
 * On the Human rights in the People's Republic of China page.


 * Who's involved?
 * Myself and Coconut99 99. To a lesser extent TastyCakes.


 * What's going on?
 * Coconut99 99 is obsessed with the wiki NPOV policy. He keeps making arbitrary demands for references and removes information he claims is not "fair" or "fact". I have tried to talk with him, find ways to reach a compromise, etc. But he is so stubborn, he can't accept he is wrong. TastyCakes is also involved to an extent. He has also been trying to make constructive improvements to the article or "deal" with CNut, but he can't reason with CNut either.


 * ''What would you like to change about that?
 * I would like him to realise that the NPOV is an ideal, not a policy that can be achieved on every article. He seems to think that the article can be "neutral", when such a thing is impossible. Do the articles on the Holocaust give time to the standpoint of Nazis and revisionist historians? The edits he makes aren't massive, but he insists that everything reflect what he thinks is "fair". I haven't even made most of the contributions on the page - I am mostly trying to maintain the status quo.


 * If you'd prefer we work discreetly, how can we reach you?
 * Please leave feedback on my user page - you don't have to hide it.


 * Would you be willing to be a mediator yourself, and accept a mediation assignment in a different case?


 * This is, following the Categorical Imperative, the idea that you might want to do
 * what you expect others to do. You don't have to, of course, that's why it's a question.


 * Potentially, though I do not always have enough time to commit to such a matter.

Mediator response
Hi there, I am Cowman109Talk and I have volunteered to mediate this case. Sorry for the delay in the response. I have looked over the edits in the article Human rights in the People's Republic of China and have examined the conflict. The first thing I would like to ask is that everyone involved quickly reviews WP:Civil and No Personal Attacks. There has been a bit of hostility in the edits, and claiming another's edits are stupid, for example does not help the matter.

Also, there is a talk page discussion going on concerning the edits in question. The notion that NPOV is impossible, also, I believe to not be true. Efforts to achieve a neutral point of view should be worked with, and I would recommend instead of reverting coconut's changes, you instead add to them or edit parts of them.

The tag is also a valuable tool to signal editors that the POV of the article should be looked at. Attempts to work on a NPOV should not be seen as vandalism, but instead should be worked with.

As the talk page discussion occured after you made the request for mediation, I'd like to ask if mediation is still required, or does it appear that the talk page discussion is making progress? Thanks. Cowman109Talk 19:13, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Update 21:25, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

This case has not seen any activity sine May 19th. My first thoughts are to suggest that those involved seek another area of dispute resolution as this apparently isn't working out. If no response is given within the next few days I will close this case and move it to the archives. Cowman109Talk 21:25, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Evidence
Please report evidence in this section with for misconduct and  for 3RR violations. If you need help ask a mediator or an advocate. Evidence is of limited use in mediation as the mediator has no authority. Providing some evidence may, however, be useful in making both sides act more civil. Etiquette: Although it's understandably difficult in a heated argument, if the other party is not as civil as you'd like them to be, make sure to be more civil than him or her, not less.

Compromise offers
This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.

Comments by others
As an aside...
 * Do the articles on the Holocaust give time to the standpoint of Nazis and revisionist historians?

Yes, actually. For example, the article The Holocaust, the section "Historical and philosophical interpretations" contains material on holocaust denial and the rationale of the German government. -- Beland 12:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't understand JohnSmith's comment "NPOV is an ideal, not a policy that can be achieved on every article". Is he implying that this article should therefore be inherently biased?--Zleitzen 19:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


 * No. I'm trying to say that it's impossible to reach a perfectly balanced page. After all there's a degree of bias in everything one says or does. John Smith&#39;s 00:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Discussion
Dispute seems to have calmed down for now - you can close this if you wish. John Smith&#39;s 08:31, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Alright. Thank you for the response! This case is closed then. If any further troubles arise, I recommend you submit another case for mediation so we can start with a fresh new page, though this case will remain on my watchlist. Cowman109Talk 15:34, 3 June 2006 (UTC)